Related Attachments

The nine-page report, issued Jan. 13, is the product of a law the S.C. General Assembly passed last year to prohibit the use of photo-radar enforcement mechanisms to catch speeders.

The discussion of the technology began when lawmakers learned the town of Ridgeland was getting ready to install the devices in August of 2010 along seven miles of Interstate 95. The town was contracting with iTraffic, a private vendor that operated the system, and would pocket a cut from all speeding-ticket revenue.

When state lawmakers found out what the town was doing, they passed legislation to kill it, citing ethical, due process and practical concerns. The town perceived a legal loophole, however, and continued using the cameras. A class action lawsuit leveled by some ticketed motorists was dismissed by a federal judge last fall.

In June lawmakers passed a new law, S. 336, to outlaw the cameras. And this time, the language was airtight.

The commission’s report entertains the hypothetical use of speed cameras, and in one section says any use should be limited to special areas such as school zones, temporary work zones, and construction zones.

“The use of camera systems on all public roads would not be in the best interest of the people of South Carolina,” states the report.

Findings, however, do make a distinction between speed cameras and other automated devices. For one thing, it may be easier to tell when a driver runs a stop sign or red light.

The commission consisted of Jean Toal, chief justice of the S.C. Supreme Court, Harry Stubblefield, president of the S.C. Law Enforcement Officers Association, representatives of the state Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the state Bar Association, and others. Among the group were leaders of the state House and Senate, who had voted to ban the technology, and Sen. Larry Grooms, R-37th District, who had introduced S. 336.